I'm willing to bet most people here who bash them do actually own them, but I haven't seen B&R since I watched it in the cinema and never would watch it again.

Man, if I didn't know any better, I'd say you were accusing this of being a Star Wars message board. Anecdotes and perception bias do not a trend indicate - it'd be like my arguing most Godzilla fans own a copy of Godzilla vs Megalon, therefore it must not be that bad.

SithLordDarthRichie said:

The Originals had poor dialogue and acting also, but much of it was overlooked because the movies were made better.

This is what we would colloquially refer to as "making a good movie." And as bad as the dialogue in the original trilogy got, it never approaches the downright infamous depths of "I hate sand" (Or, since you seem so fond of going back to Batman & Robin, I'll take "Let's kick some ice" over inexplicably racist alien accents every day) nor does the acting approach the wooden, Godzilla-sequel esque performances of Christiansen and Portman. Hell, I'd go so far as to say Empire Strikes Back had good acting, which is more than can be said of even the most emotional moments of the PT. The quality of the writing and acting, or rather, the lack thereof, are also brought into sharp focus in the PT because it unwisely chooses to focus on interactions more than actions, when the latter - as evidenced by ANH and the fight scenes in Episode III - are where Lucas does his best work. Hell, people tend to give Revenge of the Sith a free pass, and I'd chalk that up to a massive action sequence followed by the death of a much-despised character and return of a much-beloved one right at the end, which does wonders for memories.

SithLordDarthRichie said:

Critics and fans alike let their love of the OT blight their views of the PT as movies.

It's almost as if nothing happens in a cultural vacuum and it's disingenuous to claim an analysis of something otherwise. It's the same reason people don't like The Godfather Part III - a film that, incidentally, is an actual example of an average film marred by its relation to a superior progenitor - and it's the reason that 20 years from now only the hardest of the hardcore will know anything aside from a rough outline of the prequels.

SithLordDarthRichie said:

It's like when critics bash something for being unlike the book it was meant to be based on intead of analysing it as a film in its own right.

Because that happens so often. Remember when everybody nagged on the film version of Moneyball for telling a human story rather than just being a slideshow of baseball analysis methods? No wonder it never got an Oscar nod.

... Oh wait.

SithLordDarthRichie said:

Could the PT have been better, of course. Are they cinematic abominations? Hardly

I'll give you this one, I was a bit hyperbolic. But I do think "average" is being far too generous.

There may be some childhood nostalgia going on, but the OT are really objectively better than the PT on a number of levels.

What are these "objective measurements" that you are using? Even the common ones that I hear in response to this question--plot, storytelling, characters--are all a matter of taste. And I've never seen any measure by which you can objectively quantify taste. (And FWIW, I took a graduate-level storytelling class, and I did not find the PT lacking in storytelling at all. Some people may not have liked the story, but that doesn't mean there was no story.)

And I don't think this is a generation war either. All the comments about "Generation X will always love the OT best" and nostalgia are generalizations, nothing more. I was 5 years old when ANH came out, saw the O-OT in the theater, and I still like the PT just as much.

What are these "objective measurements" that you are using? Even the common ones that I hear in response to this question--plot, storytelling, characters--are all a matter of taste. And I've never seen any measure by which you can objectively quantify taste. (And FWIW, I took a graduate-level storytelling class, and I did not find the PT lacking in storytelling at all. Some people may not have liked the story, but that doesn't mean there was no story.)

How about logic and internal consistency?

Opening crawl: has dispatched two Jedi Knights...
Yoda: Confer on you the rank of Jedi Knight
Wait, he was already a knight according to the opening crawl.

This is supposedly a children's movie. The plot is about intergalactic trade and taxes. Uh-huh. Yeah, kids really dig that.

An organization called "The Trade Federation" is blocking trade? Shouldn't they be doing everything they can to promote trade?

What kind of world is it that Naboo can't get by for a few days, weeks, months, years, without more space stuff? They seem to be doing fine without.

Boss Nass: The quickest way is going through the planet's core.
Wait, the invasion army landed on or near the opposite side of the planet? Never mind "How does a planet without a rotating iron core generate the electromagnetic field" nerdisms, what kind of imbecile lands his army on the opposite side of the planet if he doesn't have to? And it doesn't take very long for the army to reach from their landing sites to the palace, so this planet core stuff really doesn't make sense.

The queen is grateful to a droid. She orders it be cleaned up as a reward. "Thank you, refrigerator, for keeping my food cool and fresh. I shall now scrub you down with bleach and cleanser, not so that you will continue to function and keep my food cool, clean, and safe to eat, but as a special reward." Does that make sense?

So, the hyper drive is leaking fuel, so it needs to be replaced? Um, shouldn't it just need a spot of duct tape and maybe some more fuel? Or just a pipe replaced somewhere? What is the GFFA's EPA like? Guess leaking all that fuel into hyperspace isn't that much of a problem, especially compared to blowing up an entire planet in another 3 movies.

Future despots and tyrants of the galaxy, especially those who embody the sinister and threatening menace of unpleasant DEATH, should not yell "Yippeee". Can you picture Hitler, Goebbels, or Goering saying "Prima! Ganz toll!" No? Neither can I.

The death toll is catastrophic? From what? What happens in these camps? Do we ever find out? What it all just a lie that Bibbil is playing along with the Trade Federation Occupation force so he can have a cushier position?

So, if no transmissions were sent, how did Maul know how to go to Tatooine?

How does Qui Gon know Maul is Sith?

Why does the Queen decide to go back to Naboo?

Is Naboo the planet, the culture, the government, the humanoid race, or some combination of the above?

Virgin Birth? uh, no. Literally impossible. Only shows up in the shoddiest of Mythologies.

Mediclorines? Never mind.

yeah, logical story telling. I'm only about 3/4 of the way through the movie, and not even hitting all the major WTF moments.

Take any character from the OT. Without saying their name or profession, or what they wear or look like, describe the character to someone who has never seen a Star Wars movie.

Take any character from the PT. Same thing.

How much more do you get from the OT characters than from the PT characters. A whole frigging lot.

OT is filmed in a variety of angles and has great camera work. The PT, after establishing shots, is filmed with 2 cameras, one looking at each person, and the film cuts back and forth. In film school, this is called "basic". There is no sophistication of any kind.

Watch the meeting on the Death Star as they discuss the Emperor's new plan dissolving the senate. All the characters are looking around with a "Cripes, we are living in dangerous times. Better make sure I come out ahead in this somehow." Look at any meeting in the

There is a difference between "Not being as good as the originals" and "Not being good."
The prequels count as "Not being good" in any respect except for some technical effects.
It is not worth documenting the mistakes here--it's been done to death several times now.

Granted. But there's also a difference between saying something sucks and "George Lucas raped my childhood"

I loathe Jar Jar Binks. I skip the entire Anakin/Padme story in Attack of the Clones every time I watch it and I cringe at the Vader Noo!, but I'm not going to demand someone bring Lucas before a War Tribunal for somehow committing some type of film genocide.

So he made three movies and they weren't as good as the originals. It happens. But many people went overboard and my guess is it's the childhood raper comments that probably did him in because that's a whole different level of hate. That vitriol should be reserved for people who have actually committed some terrible crime or human rights violation. Lucas made some bad movies. He shattered the image many fans had built up of him because he hadn't made a movie movie for so long. Fans learned he was fallible and apparently, that was a punishable offense.

And let's be clear, a bad GL movie is still better than much of the garbage Hollywood has churned out over the years.

Same with all the editing. I respect Lucas' right to make changes, just as I reserve the right not to hand him my money for these changes.

Actually they are all subjective, and that's exactly my point. All art is subjective.

You're entitled to dislike the prequels based on exactly the points you make, but that doesn't make them objectively bad movies, nor does it mean that those of us who like the prequels, must have "bad taste" because we like "bad movies." (No, you didn't say that, just throwing out an argument that I've seen batted around quite a bit, the counterpoint to the PP's "all true fans like the prequels" point. Neither are correct.)

yodaminch said:

But many people went overboard and my guess is it's the childhood raper comments that probably did him in because that's a whole different level of hate. That vitriol should be reserved for people who have actually committed some terrible crime or human rights violation.

Agreed. Or as I've said before, anyone who compares disappointment in a film franchise to sexual assault, needs serious help.

What are these "objective measurements" that you are using? Even the common ones that I hear in response to this question--plot, storytelling, characters--are all a matter of taste. And I've never seen any measure by which you can objectively quantify taste. (And FWIW, I took a graduate-level storytelling class, and I did not find the PT lacking in storytelling at all. Some people may not have liked the story, but that doesn't mean there was no story.)

How about logic and internal consistency?

Opening crawl: has dispatched two Jedi Knights...
Yoda: Confer on you the rank of Jedi Knight
Wait, he was already a knight according to the opening crawl.

This is supposedly a children's movie. The plot is about intergalactic trade and taxes. Uh-huh. Yeah, kids really dig that.

An organization called "The Trade Federation" is blocking trade? Shouldn't they be doing everything they can to promote trade?

What kind of world is it that Naboo can't get by for a few days, weeks, months, years, without more space stuff? They seem to be doing fine without.

Boss Nass: The quickest way is going through the planet's core.
Wait, the invasion army landed on or near the opposite side of the planet? Never mind "How does a planet without a rotating iron core generate the electromagnetic field" nerdisms, what kind of imbecile lands his army on the opposite side of the planet if he doesn't have to? And it doesn't take very long for the army to reach from their landing sites to the palace, so this planet core stuff really doesn't make sense.

The queen is grateful to a droid. She orders it be cleaned up as a reward. "Thank you, refrigerator, for keeping my food cool and fresh. I shall now scrub you down with bleach and cleanser, not so that you will continue to function and keep my food cool, clean, and safe to eat, but as a special reward." Does that make sense?

So, the hyper drive is leaking fuel, so it needs to be replaced? Um, shouldn't it just need a spot of duct tape and maybe some more fuel? Or just a pipe replaced somewhere? What is the GFFA's EPA like? Guess leaking all that fuel into hyperspace isn't that much of a problem, especially compared to blowing up an entire planet in another 3 movies.

Future despots and tyrants of the galaxy, especially those who embody the sinister and threatening menace of unpleasant DEATH, should not yell "Yippeee". Can you picture Hitler, Goebbels, or Goering saying "Prima! Ganz toll!" No? Neither can I.

The death toll is catastrophic? From what? What happens in these camps? Do we ever find out? What it all just a lie that Bibbil is playing along with the Trade Federation Occupation force so he can have a cushier position?

So, if no transmissions were sent, how did Maul know how to go to Tatooine?

How does Qui Gon know Maul is Sith?

Why does the Queen decide to go back to Naboo?

Is Naboo the planet, the culture, the government, the humanoid race, or some combination of the above?

Virgin Birth? uh, no. Literally impossible. Only shows up in the shoddiest of Mythologies.

Mediclorines? Never mind.

yeah, logical story telling. I'm only about 3/4 of the way through the movie, and not even hitting all the major WTF moments.

Take any character from the OT. Without saying their name or profession, or what they wear or look like, describe the character to someone who has never seen a Star Wars movie.

Take any character from the PT. Same thing.

How much more do you get from the OT characters than from the PT characters. A whole frigging lot.

OT is filmed in a variety of angles and has great camera work. The PT, after establishing shots, is filmed with 2 cameras, one looking at each person, and the film cuts back and forth. In film school, this is called "basic". There is no sophistication of any kind.

Watch the meeting on the Death Star as they discuss the Emperor's new plan dissolving the senate. All the characters are looking around with a "Cripes, we are living in dangerous times. Better make sure

I could pick a lot of holes in koohii's rant, but it would take too long.

The PT needed a Han Solo. In many ways the OT would be pretty mediocre without Harrison Ford in it, Luke was a whiney boy and Obi Wan died in the first movie. The acting was hardly stellar and there were some issues with dialogue (Ford changed the famous line in ESB, because he was able to see it needed changing).

The PT had Obi Wan & a Skywalker, but no 3rd person to fit in the Han Solo role. You needed the anti-hero slightly selfless character to add depth to it. What Lucas I think wanted to do was have Anakin play both the Luke & Han characters because he was a conflicted guy, but getting an actor as poor as Hayden to do it with poor direction and bad scripting was never going to work.

Plus he either never hired a continuity person or never listened to them, because he went against so much that was said in the OT as if he either didn't care or never bothered re-watching them before he started filming the new ones (Yoda apparently trained Obi Wan according to the OT, only he didn't because Qui Gon trained him )

Not to mention.... who gives a crap. We're talking about a series of movies imitating a ****ing space serial. Of course there are going to be internal logic and consistency problems. That's the point.

Also. TPM was the first Star Wars movie I ever sat through and at 7 years old, I loved it. Even the space taxes and the politics. It's a shame people waste their time picking out "problems" like the logistics of travelling through a planet's core (why is there sound in space) or why Queen Amidala treats a droid kindly (gee, maybe to show the contrast between life for a robot in the Republic versus the Empire? MAYBE? oh wait no lucas just totally forgot that droids are supposed to be treated badly all the time and had the opposite happen on accident because he's old and stupid. and let's not forget that humans don't have tendencies to project human qualities on objects and pets and treat them as human. definitely a dumb decision on Lucas's part yup yup).

Anyway, carry on regurgitating RLM reviews. The conversation's certainly stimulating and not remotely tedious or tired at all.

The PT needed a Han Solo. In many ways the OT would be pretty mediocre without Harrison Ford in it, Luke was a whiney boy and Obi Wan died in the first movie. The acting was hardly stellar and there were some issues with dialogue (Ford changed the famous line in ESB, because he was able to see it needed changing).

I love the PT, but I agree with this. It was lacking a Han Solo-esque character. That and the fact that there was too much story to fit in six hours of film, are the only two faults I find with it.

I still don't see why people suggest the PT needed a Solo type character, it is a completely different story with a much different tone. Han works best in the OT in part do the galaxy being more "world weary", his schtick wouldn't have worked well during the PT era. There is plenty of things wrong with the PT, but the lack of a Solo-type character isn't one of theme.